Mobile Computing, gardening and occassional fishing strategies

Originally developed to counter the initial popularity of Apple’s Mac Book Air, portable computer makers are now using the specification as a guide for portables with 14-inch, or larger, screens and other features not included in Intel’s reference design for 11 and 13-inch screen portables with long battery life.

The net effect of the popularity of ultrabooks has been increased sales of affordable portables and an initial willingness of laptop design teams to update the languishing convertible portable or factor.

Proof of this includes Lenovo’s stunning Yoga or Asus’ Transformer product lines, both of which are benchmark platforms for convertible computers.

But the ultrabook spec has also produced beneficial side effects in peripheral devices. The cost of Solid State storage devices (SSDs), which reduce boot up times from scores of seconds to double digit, or lower, times have plummeted to the point where some outlets now offer 256GB SSDs in the $100 range. DDR memory modules are now so inexpensive that many ultrabook users can easily afford to equip their portables with 8GB or more memory, thusly improving the performance of any portable with Windows 8 or other touch interfaces.

Another great example of the ultrabook specification shaping the overall future of portable computers can be found in new select 15- and 17-inch portables that reduce the carry load of users without significant penalties in battery life or functionality.

Additionally, the price of portable computers has also been influenced by the Intel ultrabook spec. While some PC makers have used Apples MacBook Air as a price reference, Companies such as Acer and Asus established entry-level pricing well below $1,000 and appear to be using a similar pricing model for new conventional portables.

Look to the skies, Intel’s ultrabook spec is driving a new generation of rugged, high performance, inexpensive portables with long battery lives and extreme portability.—JimForbes on July 27,1013

Originally developed to counter the initial popularity of Apple’s Mac Book Air, portable computer makers are now using the specification as a guide for portables with 14-inch, or larger, screens and other features not included in Intel’s reference design for 11 and 13-inch screen portables with long battery life.

The net effect of the popularity of ultrabooks has been increased sales of affordable portables and an initial willingness of laptop design teams to update the languishing convertible portable or factor.

Proof of this includes Lenovo’s stunning Yoga or Asus’ Transformer product lines, both of which are benchmark platforms for convertible computers.

But the ultrabook spec has also produced beneficial side effects in peripheral devices. The cost of Solid State storage devices (SSDs), which reduce boot up times from scores of seconds to double digit, or lower, times have plummeted to the point where some outlets now offer 256GB SSDs in the $100 range. DDR memory modules are now so inexpensive that many ultrabook users can easily afford to equip their portables with 8GB or more memory, thusly improving the performance of any portable with Windows 8 or other touch interfaces.

Another great example of the ultrabook specification shaping the overall future of portable computers can be found in new select 15- and 17-inch portables that reduce the carry load of users without significant penalties in battery life or functionality.

Additionally, the price of portable computers has also been influenced by the Intel ultrabook spec. While some PC makers have used Apples MacBook Air as a price reference, Companies such as Acer and Asus established entry-level pricing well below $1,000 and appear to be using a similar pricing model for new conventional portables.

Look to the skies, Intel’s ultrabook spec is driving a new generation of rugged, high performance, inexpensive portables with long battery lives and extreme portability.—JimForbes on July 27,1013

I can’t bring myself to sing odes to Apple on the imminent release of its new iPad Just yet!

But that’s not to say I don’t respect Apple for what it’s attempting.

The simple truth is I’m a huge fan of tablet computing and have been since the days of General Magic, Slate Inc., Momenta Inc. (a $40 million smoking hole in Silicon Valley’s ground) as well as Palm Inc. So, having lived through numerous technology revolutions and seen the powerful impact Apple can have on a category, there are things about its iPad that could be bellwethers for touch and tablet computing.

Right off the top, a launch backed by applications that take advantage of not just the technology but also the IPad’s form factor is a great first step. I don’t regard third party padded carrying cases, messenger envelopes or wire frame stands for the iPad as significant parts of the launch and believe thatall of this should be included in the original purchase price.

I’m sure there will be hardware opportunities in the iPad market.I can imagine a rush of wireless keyboards for the new device. Unfortunately, I remember all the third-party keyboards for Palm and Pocket PC devices andhow quickly they failed. But short range networking and wireless hardware could play a big part in the eventual success of iPad.

And this brings me to the AT&T wireless modem –equipped iPad. In the past, along with other pundits who follow portable computing, I have a love/hate relationship with cellular-phone network based data networking.I love the fact that I can attach to the Internet remotely in venues lacking WiFi access. But the cost of monthly service adds as much as $500 to $700 a year in costs to the portable. With iPad service provider AT&T is offering an inexpensive day use rate, which fits my budget and how often I really require cell-based networking capabilities. I applaud Apple an AT&T for this feature and really believe it’s a step in the right direction for untethered mobile computing.

There are some great applications for Apples tablet computer in the works and I believe they are significant enough to help build momentum for tablet computing. Second generation mapping applications that can be used by consumers to locate businesses offering special pricing on consumer and other goods is one example. Think MapQuest with pushed coupons or offers. Although such apps are emerging for the iPhone, their migration to the iPad seems like an evolutionary migration.

NetFlix, sundry printed publication applications, Yahoo’s content and the like are big examples of ho-hum apps to me. Some of these are already available for the iPhone.At best my initial take on the iPad is simple: it’s a better, much more capable, Kindle. It has to be noted that Apple’s recent agreements with textbook publishers such as McGraw Hill are a return to Apple’s once vaunted educational market.

But are college students willing to pay $500 for an electronic book reader with an integrated onscreen keyboard? Looking back, a similar question about pricing was asked of Macintoshes in the college market and more than a few industry execs were surprised to find out that, yes, college students were willing to pay $1,000 for a Mac. And that was an intrinsic part of the early Apple Macintosh story.Apple could repeat this scenario today with the iPad, but one problem is apparent: College students are accustomed to selling their textbooks at the end of the course and, as yet, there is no mechanism for reselling electronic versions of college textbooks.

Also, I question one of the often proposed usage scenarios for the iPad—watching movies or episodic television on its smallish screen. To begin with, there are already other numerous mechanisms for this application in existence now. And most of those have larger screens and much better audio than the new iPad.

I’ve always had a fear that Apple developed products for itself. That’s part of the reason I’m not enamored of a business model that’s based on Silicon Valley coffee shop usage. That model just doesn’t play in the Heartland where people meet at the local Cracker Barrel or Dennys before starting their workday at a nearby grain silo or agricultural implement repair shop.

But there are new applications Apple can pioneer with iPad. Medicine is one such area and it’s notout of the realm of possibility to imagine iPads being used to collect vital signs and patient information and then transmitting trhyat information to a doc as he heads to a patient exam room. Many such apps are as profitable as they are glamorous. Furthermore, it wold be easier topitch this business model to venture capitalists than it would be a simplea pp that collects pennies on the transaction. Now go a step further and imagine iPads being used at medical conferences or required continuing education classes to distribute rich media pertaining to new treatment programs, surgical procedures or drug therapies.

It’s such ideas that really do bring outa sense of child-like wonder when I think of Apple today.

If Apple turns tablet and touch computing into a success I’ll be among the first in a long line of industry pundits to give credit for a job well done. I believe tablet and touch computing is about to come of age and Apple has the wherewithal to help make this happen.

And what’s good for the Apple iPad is also good for the HP Slate, and Lenovo’s S10-3t family, as well as the eight other new tablets being ready to be unveiled in Taipei next month at the Computex trade show in Taiwan. I may not buy an Apple iPad, but I do admire it’s potential to fulfill a long dream of portable computing—touch sensitive tablet computing with numerous connectivity options.—Jim Forbes on 040/02/2010

My child-like sense ofwonder hasn’t been fueled by Apple’s new iPad or any of the other new slate computers introduced or unveiled recently

But that’s not to say I’ve changed my mind about slate computers.

Slate (aka tablet) computers are one of personal computing’s oldest promises. At its heart this concept couples persistent computing and access to rich data (or less complex data types). And, by definition, such machines need to be as portable as they are technically versatile.

I very much believe tablet computers can and will subsume dedicated devices such as e-books. Although I’m personally still bound to conventional books, I can easily understand how the widespread availability of electronic text books could drive me into buying a slate computer, were I still a student.But e-book readers are not full-fledged computers and the student side of the academic computing market is notoriously price sensitive. Does anyone really think students have $500 or more to buy a portable with limited functionality?

Apple has taken its share of grief over the iPad. Much of the criticism is warranted; because IPad—like all slate computers-- is neither fish nor fowl nor good red meat. I suspect preconceived notions such as an inability to visualize a portable computer without a conventional keyboard are responsible for some of the friction iPad and other slate computers face.

The form factor of slate computers also challenges existing conventions. Their shape doesn’t fit in any pocket, except those on the legs of military-style cargo jeans. This means it needs to be toted from one location to another as if it were a book.

What’s most interesting is that slate computers such as Apple’s iPad seem to be invariably demonstrated or described as being used in a casual setting as a means of keeping up with email, reading online periodicals or even text books or enjoying streamed entertainment files.

But I suspect anyone who buys a slate computer will want to do more, much more, with their machines and therein lies the rub. No matter if it’s a conventional portable, a convertible sub compact with a touch screen or a slate computer, keyboards will be key elements of the user experience and determine how satisfied the user is with their device.

Initially, most of the slate computers that have been demonstrated, described or shown as concept drawings have all used virtual keyboards on the device’s LCD screen. And, based on several years’ experience using touch screen computers equipped with virtual keyboards, I’ve learned that latency increases dramatically as the number of processes running on the computer increases. And, there may be no faster way to alienate a user than having a machine slow down and appear to be mired because it simply lacks the horsepower to provide a user experience that’s on a par with user expectations.

I give points to Apple and others –Lenovo and HP to name a couple—for touting long battery life in their slate computers. If this form factor isto succeed transcontinental ( 8 hours or more) battery life is required. This is as important for the electronic book segment of the slate market as it is any other potential market.

What Apple didn’t really address with iPad was persistent 3G (or faster) connectivity. Of course this adds to the total cost of ownership of a slate device, but WAN connectivity is fast becoming a mandatory capability in the compact portable market.

I’ve always enjoyed watching and covering Apple’s new technology but I’ve been around long enough to remember that while Apple always brings great new industrial designs and often revolutionary concepts to market, it’s not necessarily always been the first to do so. I remember Digital Research’s GEM graphical environment and early versions of Windows—all of which preceded the Mac. But what has propelled Apple’s success isn’t necessarily the brilliance of Steve Jobs, but rather an institutional ethos that compels the company to stay in the game and consistently improve its products.

If had been working as a reporter when Apple launched the iPad the place I would have wanted to be wasn’t at Apple’s launch, but rather sitting in a room with Palm’s CEO, Jon Rubenstein, and its founder, Jeff Hawkins. Was it only two years ago that Hawkins proposed and championed a n iPad like slate computer at Palm? I wish I could have seen their reactions to Apple’s iPad launch.

But Apple has opened a flood gate and I suspect we’re about to be deluged with slate computers. And that’s not necessarily a bad thing.-Jim Forbes 02/03/2010.

I've grown quite tired of technology and business writers making hay and headlines with reports on the health of Apple's co-founder Steve jobs.

Reports in Gawker Media's ValleyWaghere stating that Mr. jobs had been admitted to Stanford hospital over the weekend, speculating he was being operated on for Liver Cancer drove me over the edge.

The post carried information from a source identified only as being an employee of Stanford Hospital.That an employee of any hospital would publicly disclose whether or not anyone is a patient at the hospital and provides the media any information on a patient's condition goes beyond despicable. Furthermore, that bottom feeding reporters who never leave their offices or homes to conduct basic "fact" gathering would base their information on such sources goes beyond the pale. In addition, what sets my teeth futrher on edge about ValleyWag and other media outlets coverage of Steve jobs is that reporters don't seem not to be asking a fundamental question: "Does the source have reason to know the information they've provided me."

I've reached the point in life where I've grown exceedingly tired of reading about Steve Jobs. That's not the same as saying I don't care about Apple, or Mr.Jobs' future or impact on the company and personal computing.

Truthfully, i care about both Apple and the cautionary tale that I think will be Steve Jobs' heritage when the day comes he leaves Apple at the end of a very noteworthy career.

There are Several things I'd like to see in this regard: Foremost, I want to see a reporter or book author get off their asses, out of their offices and try to make face to face contact with Jobs after having first prepared appropriate questions. Part and parcel with this, I'd also like to see named sources in articles and forthcoming books. I'm tired of the same rehash of the story told initially by ex-Infoworld reporters Paul Freiberger and Mike Swain in the seminal book, "Fire in the Valley." Editorial managers and literary agents have played a huge role in my changing view of how poorly Mr. Jobs and Apple has been covered. No one seems to be demanding basic reporting, resulting in books that under serve Apple's on-going story.

Also, why have so few reporters tried to turn Apple board members, or informed third parties into sources? If there was ever a time for enterprise reporting techniques to be used on Apple, it's now.

It's unfortunate that the working press has gotten lazy in its Apple coverage. It's a sad day when hacks turn to second rate sources, or do their reporting while leeching free drinks at parties hosted by Web 2.0 sometime luminaries blowing chunks of their first-round funding on parties for technological strap hangers.

Covering Apple and Steve jobs has always been a challenging editorial assignment for most reporters. Sadly, few reporters ever drilled down beyond this company's veneer and the culture of it founders. I hope that someday, an author will take the time to do a worthwhile book on the culture Steve jobs created and drove. What I've read for the last decade, however, convinces me that stories about Apple are under reported and overblown.

Steve jobs faces serious health issues. In addition to being Apple's on-leave chairman and CEO, he is also a husband and a father. It's time he was allowed to have some semblance of privacy--Jim Forbes 01/25/2009.

(Disclosure: I covered Apple as a reporter at InfoWorld and PC Week and admit to having used unnamed sources at times when the source declined to be named but satisfied me that they had reason to know about the subject matter I was reporting on. I was known to rummage through trash, call people in the evenings and conduct amicable "ambush" interviews away from controlling corporate spokespeople. )

So, I trekked 8 miles down to the Apple store at the local Westfield Mall and waited my turn to touch and look at Apple’s beautiful new portable.

Fortunately, when I came home, a boyhood chum who also lives in the San Diego area called me, mentioning he had the new MacBook and invited me down to his place for a “test drive.”

Fishtailing down four lanes of I-15, I pulled into my buddy’s driveway 20 minutes after I hung up. I sat down in front of his new shiny MacBook and opened a Works document file.

I like the fit and finish of the new macbook with the 13-inch screen a great deal. The case appears solid enough to withstand earthquakes, repeated trips around campus in a back pack as well as hurried runs through hallways to ad hoc staff meetings.Solid construction is vital to any portable, since it’s yet another guarantee of product reliability On it’s shiny aluminum surfaces, Apple’s new Mac Books look tough, as in Panzer tough.

My one minor concern about this machine’s construction is based on what I know about metals and alloys.If I bought one of the new machines, I would make damn sure I also purchased a padded sleeve for it. One of the downsides of aluminum construction is that aluminum is easily scratched.

The screen on this machine may be one it’s most important feature. It’s incredibly bright and produce displays that should make most users quite happy.

In fact Video is the one application that sets the new unibody Macbook at the top of a very short list of portable computers that may be ideal for enthusiast video editing. Its nVidia graphics controller flat out delivers screamer performance and the backlit glass panel display yields stunning grsphics. I was extremely surprised to see how good displays looked on the new MacBook when I took it outside. The display gets high passing grades from me indoors or outdoors.

One downside: Apple’s use of an nVidia video controller designed for desktops may cut into battery life, but appropriate power management should address this slight shortcoming.

Another element of the new Apple unibody portables that’s apparent is this: Apple’s learned from its past mistakes. For example: the new machines come standard with an optical drive (not included in the Macbook Air) and important user interface hardware such as the keyboards and trackpad have also been changed.

I like the new raised keys used on this revamped portable line. They have above average tactile feedback.In fact, I believe the Macbook’s new keyboard is as good as anything used by Lenovo on ThinkPad machines.

I have mixed feelings on Apple’s new (glass-covered) track pad. On one hand the lack of surface tension is nice and honestly compliments using gestures for image and data manipulation. Sadly, I inadvertently sent the cursor to unexpected places on the screen two or three times during my brief test of this new portable (caused I suspect by the fact I have very large hands and am somewhat handicapped in my left hand). I quickly, however, mastered and came to admire the clickable trackpad, which seems to me to be a natural, but long-overdue extension of track pad technologies

In summary, the new MacBook’s design is nice and helps to make it standout in a crowded market. Its construction, fit and finish compliment the image of this portable’s durability.The graphics controller and screen technologies deliver an experience that’s well above average. I really do like the trackpad and keyboard on the new unibody Macbook and MacBook Pros but sincerely wish Apple had used lighted keys on this new product line’s entry level machines. I think Apple’s pricing for the unibody Macbook’s is artificially high but believe there are users who will buy them anyway.

In the grand scheme of things, aluminum unibody construction is nice, but I doubt it’s a tipping point in anyone’s purchase decision. This seems particularly true in a market where consumers are increasingly influenced foremost by price.If you buy a new unibody Macbook go the extra distance and buy a padded sleeve to cradle this notebook in your backpack, book bag or attaché case. And, unless you want to spend hours rubbing and polishing out scratches, never ever put your keys in the same luggage real estate as your new MacBook.

TGhe new Macbooks don't make it to the short list of "poroduct's I'd like to buy" because iu think it's priced to high—Jim Forbes on 11/01/2008

I’m a big fan of all-in-one computer designs like Apple’s new svelte iMac. I like they way they look and I love the idea of freeing up desk space for more of the essential clutter of my life. Truth be told, I think Apple’s industrial designs are fetching. But that’s not why I think watching Apple’s progress in the computer market should be a primary concern to Microsoft and a small handful of licensees such as Hewlett Packard, Gateway, and Acer (all of which have also developed and marketed all-in-one desktop designs over the years).

Three times over the last 9 months I have urged friends or relatives to buy an Apple iMac. In each case, I made my recommendation because an Intel-based iMac didn’t require that the owner go out and buy Mac-specific software, or because the consultee could really benefit from several of the Mac’s somewhat unique features.

The most important Apple feature today is Mac OSX. It’s incredibly reliable, powerful and one of the most utilitarian operating systems ever developed for a personal computer. And I believe OSX is a real threat to Microsoft’s one-time market hegemony.

Another thing I really love about current the current and just released iMac line is its software bundle. It’s first-rate and redefines the words and concept of “personal productivity software.” It’s not like much of the current disk wasting shovel ware that clutters up most consumer Wintel machines. I’m somewhat interested in cinematography and filmmaking. If I were a lot younger and in college, I’d have an iMac in my dorm and use it to produce documentaries on California history and other topics I’m interested in.

One of the best start-up pitches I’ve ever seen (including the nearly ten yearsI produced Demo shows) was shown to me last year at a local college. The entire pitch was assembled and produced using bundled Mac software and shown to me on an iMac with a huge 24-inch screen.It was presented using iFilm and had I been capable of investing in this student business plan I might have cut a check on the spot. Hands down, it was better than any PowerPoint pitch I’ve ever seen.

Apple has changed recently. While it enjoys the most loyal user base in the known galaxy, it now seems to understand that money doesn’t reallygrow on trees . The iMac platform comes with most everything anyone needs to get basic tasks completed and it doesn’t require its users to go out and spend nearly a grand on software and hardware, or to become software-copying felons. Chalk another one up for the new Apple.

That iMac can also run Windows is not the least bit important to me. And, looking back over 20 years, it’s never really been all that important to Mac users since the capability was introduced via add-in coprocessor cards when the first expandable Macs were introduced a long time ago.

I hope Microsoft is paying close attention to what Apple has done with OSX, and the Mac’s personal productivity applications. And this certainly applies to the manufacturers of Windows-based computers.

Apple’s designs are attractive and moderately priced. But there is still one thing that the Wintel architecture does much better than Apple.That task is using a desktop computer as a personal video recorder.As it stands now, Windows Media Center computers are much less expensive than the iMac/Apple TV combination.

Wintel for now has a decided lead in tablet computing. Although Apple reportedly has much of the basic technology for tablet computingin house, it has yet to launch a convertible version of it’s MacBook portable.

But I have a gut feeling that this too will change before the leaves on my stone fruit and avocado trees turn red, then orange, then brown.

In the end the more competition there is in the marketplace, the better the experience for users. And who knows, maybe a renewed hard charging Apple could force Microsoft off the dime and make it refocus on true innovation. Jim Forbes, Apple Dreaming on rural northern San Diego County on 0870/07/2007.